Confidence in counting of ballots in Guyana and America

Dear editor,

I CANNOT help but notice that there were/are vast differences in the counting of ballots in America and Guyana. There is confidence in the integrity of the electoral system in the U.S. that is almost completely missing in Guyana.
America voted on November 3 and the ballots are still being counted, a process that is delayed because of mail-in and absentee ballots that would take several days. (In elections, the winner is known a few hours after voting closes). Guyana voted on March 2 and it took some five months to declare the winner as attempts were made, supported by some GECOM staff, to rig the outcome. Unlike in Guyana, the integrity of the ballots and even voting were preserved in America. In Guyana, counting and even aspects of the election process and voting were compromised by officials who are or were biased towards one party. In America, election officials don’t take sides.

Media pix (videos and still photos) from across the U.S. and visits to polling places in New York reveal a mix of the ethnic backgrounds of polling staff representative of the general composition of voting areas – Whites, Indians, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and others. In Guyana, the poll workers and election officials absolutely do not represent the ethnic distribution of the population. This, in itself, undermines peoples’ confidence in the electoral process, given the history of electoral fraud under the PNC and the role of affiliated staff in doing the rigging. A balanced ethnic representation of the leadership of the election secretariat will boost confidence in the work of GECOM. And this was conspicuously missing in 2020 as well as in several earlier elections. Ethnic diversity of election boards (GECOM) wards against thoughts of electoral fraud or skullduggery as happened in 2020.

Decades ago, poll workers in America were almost all Whites, who conspired to rig the system against Black Americans. Blacks and other minorities lacked confidence in the voting process similar to how members of ethnic groups fear fraud in voting in Guyana, because the staff is overwhelmingly of one ethnicity. In the USA, Black votes were often not counted or Blacks were turned away from polling places or their ballots were thrown away as what Burnham did to PPP (Indian) votes in 1968, 1973 and 1980 and what Hoyte did in 1985. All of that has changed in America, but in Guyana many staff members are still part of the Burnham rigging process as was experienced in 2020.

Over the last few decades, Black Americans have had very good representation in leadership of election bodies.  Their strong presence made rigging impossible. Blacks have also had more than a fair share in the composition of staff at voting sites as I observed in visiting several places of polling in Queens and Brooklyn.  I visited several polling stations in Georgetown on polling day and outside of the city and it was clear to me that the staff was/is not representative of the population. Amerindians and Indians were under-represented. I spoke with GECOM election officials and party representatives about the composition of election day workers and they agreed with my I observation. And I also watched video clippings of individuals working on voting day in Guyana. The staff is overwhelmingly of one ethnicity – certainly not representative of the multi-ethnic character of the nation. GECOM officials agree that much work needs to be done to have ethnic balance. The unbalanced ethnic composition undermines confidence in the electoral process. GECOM should make an effort to have ethnic parity in order to raise confidence in the work of the body and the electoral system.

The conduct and performance of staff also impact public confidence in elections. In Guyana, as we observed in 2020, several staff members did not conduct themselves professionally; they were racially biased and politically partisan. In America, the staff conducted themselves professionally in the execution of their duties.  Although election commissioners (heads of each polling district, equivalent of a region or a polling station in Guyana) and poll workers had their own party or candidate preference, they acted professionally, not goading people how to or for whom to vote. No staff member was reported or accused to have been involved in fraud (participating in ballot stuffing and or encouraging multiple voting) as what happened in Guyana on March 2 and the vote-counting process. In the U.S., there was no reported impersonation of voters during the voting process which is unlike what took place in Guyana. In Guyana, poll workers facilitated impersonation of voters in some neighbourhoods, especially in high-density urban areas.

Electoral fraud is a serious offence. It is akin to treason because it seeks to undermine the system of choosing a government. In some countries, employees accused of electoral fraud are summarily jailed, if not executed, pending an inquiry. Charges of fraud have been filed against several GECOM officials, but justice is moving slowly and the riggers have support from some politicians and two political parties. The accused are not facing mere allegations. Their actions in electoral fraud were publicly and transparently observed by the media, diplomatic corps, and international observers. The evidence against them is overwhelming. Guilt is merely a formality. As the trial is awaited, the accused and others implicated in electoral fraud must be removed from their duties; that is standard practice.  People lack confidence in them. There should be an immediate inquiry into the behaviour of GECOM staff, as well as election day workers during the five-month ordeal and appropriate action taken against them, depending on the report and involvement in fraud.

In any democratic country, the accused would have resigned or stepped aside while their case is heard in a court. Failing that, they would have been removed by the head of the agency or company from their positions until the matter is heard in court. Neither action has been undertaken in Guyana in the electoral fraud matter.  It is inexplicable why the GECOM chair or the commission has not taken that step to discipline them and or remove them from duties.

Also, in any job, there are performance ratings for continuation in office or for promotion. Surely, the performance of GECOM staff would (should) have been evaluated. That needs to be urgently done if not already conducted and appropriate action taken against them. GECOM cannot afford to have mediocre performance or anyone involved in electoral fraud on staff. Unless disciplined, staff would continue to under-perform or misbehave in office or engage in fraud. Examples must be made of them. They should have been terminated months ago if not right after March 2 or immediately after they were caught in the acts of fraud.

Guyana should follow the example in the U.S. where attempted fraud is a serious offence that carries criminal indictment and civil penalties including loss of the right to vote again. Unlike in Guyana, in the USA, staff members accused of fraud or wrongdoing at a polling station or any job site are immediately removed from their positions pending an investigation or criminal charges or conviction. The penalties are not worth the risk of engaging in fraud in America. It is almost impossible to get away with fraud in America. Thus, few dare to test the system for fear of spending time in jail.

On election morning in New York, I visited several polling stations in Richmond Hill, Woodhaven, Ozone Park, Queens Village, Hollis, and a couple Black neighbourhoods. (There are ethnic neighbourhoods in NYC). I observed a diverse election staff inclusive of dozens of Indo and a handful of Afro Guyanese and other Caribbean nationals. They all acted professionally.

There is no reason to believe that they would compromise their integrity and professionalism. In past elections, when there were issues relating to voting or campaign canvassing, they reported incidents to their supervisors and to the police. Any attempt to intimidate staff or violate the rules of voting and campaigning was dealt with professionally and urgently. The police (one is present at every polling station) acted instantly to rectify any issue and or make arrests; not like in Guyana where the police and election staff close their eyes to fraud once it benefits the party they support.

In the USA, election supervisors took corrective action.  It is because of quick disciplinary action and or arrests that there are minimal incidents of attempted fraud in the U.S. and in other countries sch as the UK, Canada, Denmark, Australia, etc.
Guyana cannot afford to go into an election with the same electoral fraud accused like Lowenfield, Myers, Mingo, and others whose behaviour compromised the integrity of balloting and counting to favour their party. It is not enough that they be charged as would happen in USA. They should already have been suspended as would have been the case in America.

Everyone who was implicated as a participant in fraud (electoral and otherwise) must be removed from GECOM while an investigation or commission of inquiry is launched. The electoral-fraud implicated must be disciplined now, removed from GECOM, in order to commence the preparation for local government elections 2021. Doubts would linger about the integrity and professionalism of the operations of GECOM and on voting and counting of ballots were fraud accused and fraud-implicated staff were to remain in the elections body. Once GECOM is reformed and all of its staff conduct themselves professionally, people would place their faith in the voting and counting of ballots.

Yours truly,
Dr Vishnu Bisram